On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Patrick Greenwell wrote:

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Mathew Butler wrote:

...

Adrian: The key word is "cooperating". New.net (and its brethren that are being born in technology incubators as we speak) are not "cooperating", they're intentionally "culture-jamming" for their own gain.

Perhaps you might like to define "cooperating" for us? Has ICANN cooperated with the individuals and organizations that currently run alternate TLDs which predate the existence of ICANN? Or is it rather simply that "might makes right" and they only need to cooperate with "people that matter?"

At some point cooperation has to yield to due process - at least that's the history of society to date. Unless there's a major change to the Internet infrastructure, we need DNS to function reliably, and that requires that the root nameservers behave the way they're supposed to. Just as key pieces of the telephone system are REQUIRED to behave in certain ways - as negotiated through well defined and legally sanctioned processes, and enforced by the ITU and various national level authorities - so must key pieces of the Internet be under the jurisdiction of clearly defined processes and authorities. The Internet is no longer an experiment that people can mess around with with impunity. Right now, like it or not, ICANN is the duly authorized authority for Internet naming and numbering. Of course that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. ************************************************************************** The Center for Civic Networking PO Box 600618 Miles R. Fidelman, President & Newtonville, MA 02460-0006 Director, Municipal Telecommunications Strategies Program 617-558-3698 fax: 617-630-8946 mfidelman@civicnet.org http://civic.net/ccn.html Information Infrastructure: Public Spaces for the 21st Century Let's Start With: Internet Wall-Plugs Everywhere Say It Often, Say It Loud: "I Want My Internet!" **************************************************************************

On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Patrick Greenwell wrote:

On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Miles Fidelman wrote:

...

...

At some point cooperation has to yield to due process - at least that's the history of society to date. Unless there's a major change to the Internet infrastructure, we need DNS to function reliably, and that requires that the root nameservers behave the way they're supposed to.

I don't see any problem with anything you have said. I think the difficulty comes when I tell you that the root servers I choose to use are operating fine, and you attempt to tell me that I have to use yours.

For the Internet to work, at least with currently accepted DNS standards, everyone has to use the same root servers. Otherwise things can rapidly degenerate into chaos. The whole point of law and due process is that a duly authorized somebody has to have the authority to insist that everyone use the same root servers. ************************************************************************** The Center for Civic Networking PO Box 600618 Miles R. Fidelman, President & Newtonville, MA 02460-0006 Director, Municipal Telecommunications Strategies Program 617-558-3698 fax: 617-630-8946 mfidelman@civicnet.org http://civic.net/ccn.html Information Infrastructure: Public Spaces for the 21st Century Let's Start With: Internet Wall-Plugs Everywhere Say It Often, Say It Loud: "I Want My Internet!" **************************************************************************

On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Shawn McMahon wrote:

...

degenerate into chaos. The whole point of law and due process is that a duly authorized somebody has to have the authority to insist that everyone use the same root servers.

Somehow, I really don't think the founding fathers had that in mind.

Somehow I think that's EXACTLY what the founding fathers had in mind: "The Congress shall have power to ... fix the standard of weights and measures" U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Par. 5 ************************************************************************** The Center for Civic Networking PO Box 600618 Miles R. Fidelman, President & Newtonville, MA 02460-0006 Director, Municipal Telecommunications Strategies Program 617-558-3698 fax: 617-630-8946 mfidelman@civicnet.org http://civic.net/ccn.html Information Infrastructure: Public Spaces for the 21st Century Let's Start With: Internet Wall-Plugs Everywhere Say It Often, Say It Loud: "I Want My Internet!" **************************************************************************

Shawn McMahon <smcmahon@eiv.com> asked,

On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:01:46AM -0500, Miles Fidelman wrote:

...

Somehow I think that's EXACTLY what the founding fathers had in mind:

"The Congress shall have power to ... fix the standard of weights and measures" U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Par. 5

So which are the root servers, a unit of weight, or a unit of length?

Why limit oneself? It is reasonable to assume that the successful deployment of a root server represents a milestone. 1 mile = 5280 feet 1 stone = 14 pounds Therefore, a milestone is equal to 73920 foot pounds. Convert to your preferred units.

hmm yes okay but are you aware that the usa doesnt make up the largest part of the internet, the rest of the world does? the congress has no power there.. Steve On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Miles Fidelman wrote:

On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Shawn McMahon wrote:

...

...

degenerate into chaos. The whole point of law and due process is that a duly authorized somebody has to have the authority to insist that everyone use the same root servers.

Somehow, I really don't think the founding fathers had that in mind.

Somehow I think that's EXACTLY what the founding fathers had in mind:

"The Congress shall have power to ... fix the standard of weights and measures" U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Par. 5

************************************************************************** The Center for Civic Networking PO Box 600618 Miles R. Fidelman, President & Newtonville, MA 02460-0006 Director, Municipal Telecommunications Strategies Program 617-558-3698 fax: 617-630-8946 mfidelman@civicnet.org http://civic.net/ccn.html

Information Infrastructure: Public Spaces for the 21st Century Let's Start With: Internet Wall-Plugs Everywhere Say It Often, Say It Loud: "I Want My Internet!" **************************************************************************

On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Jeff Workman wrote:

<humor> "We the people, in order to provide proper DNS service...." </humor>

Jeff

<no humour whatsoever> "We the network operators, in order to provide a functioning Internet so as to justify doing really cool things with really expensive toys...." I don't know what your job entails, but my job description includes the phrase "keeping the network and all associated servers and services functional." Which means, among other things, making sure DNS works. Were I to go with new.net, I would be remiss in my duties and should (though I probably wouldn't) be fired. MAtthew Devney Network Operator (among other things)

On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 10:05:15AM -0500, Shawn McMahon wrote:

I buy that as a reason for you not to use them, and I buy that as a reason for me not to use them.

I don't buy it as a reason to make what they're doing illegal, which is what a few in this discussion are advocating.

That'd be like making IPX illegal, because it prevents those machines from properly interoperating with TCP/IP.

While I don't advocate making it illegal (well, not moreso than I do for any other irresponsible act), your analogy misses the mark. I fail to see how I could enter an IP address as a destination and have it go to a different destination because the IPX network carried it there. *waits for tongue-in-cheek replies about tunneling* -c

Stoned koala bears drooled eucalyptus spit in awe as Patrick Greenwell exclaimed:

Perhaps you might like to define "cooperating" for us? Has ICANN cooperated with the individuals and organizations that currently run alternate TLDs which predate the existence of ICANN? Or is it rather simply that "might makes right" and they only need to cooperate with "people that matter?"

I cannot say that I agree wholeheartedly with ICANN's decision making process. However, New.Net's way of creating new TLDs is *not* the way to do it! Furthermore, attempting to circumvent ICANN and the current DNS system is *not* going to get New.Net any brownie points with them, and most certainly isn't going to help get new TLDs established in the proper DNS root. Besides, why can't you face the fact that this isn't some rebellion against ICANN? It's nothing more than a money scam. I seriously doubt that New.Net or it's investors care about ICANN or it's politics. Somebody got an idea, saw dollar signs, and the marketroids went wild. This kind of greed, IMNSHO, contributes largely to the poor performance of dotcom/tech stocks currently. If the marketroids are going to have this level of control over the technical aspects of the Internet, why don't we all just march over to the marketing department, hand them our root and enable passwords, and tell them, "Ok, you created this mess, now run the fscking thing yourself!" and take a _long_ vacation? Jeff -- "...and the burnt fool's bandaged finger goes wobbling back to the fire." -Joe Zeff in the SDM.